Article

Saxagliptin added to a submaximal dose of sulphonylurea improves glycaemic control compared with uptitration of sulphonylurea in patients with type 2 diabetes: a randomised controlled trial.

Diabetes Center, Federal University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
International Journal of Clinical Practice (Impact Factor: 2.54). 07/2009; 63(9):1395-406. DOI: 10.1111/j.1742-1241.2009.02143.x
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Assess the efficacy and safety of saxagliptin added to a submaximal sulphonylurea dose vs. uptitration of sulphonylurea monotherapy in patients with type 2 diabetes and inadequate glycaemic control with sulphonylurea monotherapy.
A total of 768 patients (18-77 years; HbA(1c) screening >or= 7.5 to <or= 10.0%) were randomised and treated with saxagliptin 2.5 or 5 mg in combination with glyburide 7.5 mg vs. glyburide 10 mg for 24 weeks. Blinded uptitration glyburide was allowed in the glyburide-only arm to a maximum total daily dose of 15 mg. Efficacy analyses were performed using ANCOVA and last-observation-carried-forward methodology.
At week 24, 92% of glyburide-only patients were uptitrated to a total glyburide dose of 15 mg/day. Saxagliptin 2.5 and 5 mg provided statistically significant adjusted mean decreases from baseline to week 24 vs. uptitrated glyburide, respectively, in HbA(1c) (-0.54%, -0.64% vs. +0.08%; both p < 0.0001) and fasting plasma glucose (-7, -10 vs. +1 mg/dl; p = 0.0218 and p = 0.002). The proportion of patients achieving an HbA(1c) < 7% was greater for saxagliptin 2.5 and 5 mg vs. uptitrated glyburide (22.4% and 22.8% vs. 9.1%; both p < 0.0001). Postprandial glucose area under the curve was reduced for saxagliptin 2.5 and 5 mg vs. uptitrated glyburide (-4296 and -5000 vs. +1196 mg.min/dl; both p < 0.0001). Adverse event occurrence was similar across all groups. Reported hypoglycaemic events were not statistically significantly different for saxagliptin 2.5 (13.3%) and 5 mg (14.6%) vs. uptitrated glyburide (10.1%).
Saxagliptin added to submaximal glyburide therapy led to statistically significant improvements vs. uptitration of glyburide alone across key glycaemic parameters and was generally well tolerated.

0 Followers
 · 
94 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The patterns and determinants of saxagliptin use among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) are unknown in real-world settings. We compared the characteristics of T2DM patients who were new initiators of saxagliptin to those who were new initiators of non-dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitor oral anti-diabetic drugs (OADs) and identified factors associated with saxagliptin use. We conducted a cross-sectional study within the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD), The Health Improvement Network (THIN), US Medicare, and the HealthCore Integrated Research Database (HIRD(SM)) across the first 36 months of saxagliptin availability (29 months for US Medicare). Patients were included if they were: 1) ≥18 years old, 2) newly prescribed saxagliptin or a non-DPP-4 inhibitor OAD, and 3) enrolled in their respective database for 180 days. For each saxagliptin initiator, we randomly selected up to ten non-DPP-4 inhibitor OAD initiators matched on age, sex, and geographic region. Conditional logistic regression was used to identify determinants of saxagliptin use. We identified 64,079 saxagliptin initiators (CPRD: 1,962; THIN: 2,084; US Medicare: 51,976; HIRD(SM): 8,057) and 610,660 non-DPP-4 inhibitor OAD initiators (CPRD: 19,484; THIN: 19,936; US Medicare: 493,432; HIRD(SM): 77,808). Across all four data sources, prior OAD use, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia were associated with saxagliptin use. Saxagliptin initiation was also associated with hemoglobin A1c results >8% within the UK data sources, and a greater number of hemoglobin A1c measurements in the US data sources. In these UK and US data sources, initiation of saxagliptin was associated with prior poor glycemic control, prior OAD use, and diagnoses of hypertension and hyperlipidemia. ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers NCT01086280 , NCT01086293 , NCT01086319 , NCT01086306 , and NCT01377935.
    04/2015; 16(1):8. DOI:10.1186/s40360-015-0007-z
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To review the oral and injectable pharmacologic treatment options for type 2 diabetes. A literature search was conducted using PubMed electronic database for studies published in English between 1993 and September 2014. Search terms included diabetes mellitus, type 2 diabetes, and the individual name for each antidiabetic medication reviewed. In addition, manual searches were performed for cross-references from publications. Package inserts, United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Web site, Institute for Safe Medication Practices Web site, American Diabetes Association Web site and scientific session poster presentations, and individual drug company Web pages were also reviewed. This review focused on information elucidated over the past 10 years to assist prescribers in choosing optimal therapy based on individual patient characteristics. Studies leading to the approval of or raising safety concerns for the antidiabetic medications reviewed in this article were included. In the past 10 years, there have been 4 novel oral antidiabetic medication classes and 10 new injectable agents and insulin products approved by the FDA for the treatment of type 2 diabetes as well as new information regarding the safety and use of several older antidiabetic medication classes. The distinctions were reviewed for each individual agent, and a comparison was completed if there was more than one agent in a particular therapeutic class. Using current information available, select investigational agents in phase III trials or with a pending new drug application were highlighted. There are now 9 distinct oral pharmacologic classes and a variety of insulin and noninsulin injectable medications available for the treatment of type 2 diabetes. Metformin remains the first-line treatment option for most patients. When considering options for alternative or additional treatment, prescribers must weigh the benefits and risks using individual patient characteristics. © The Author(s) 2015.
    Annals of Pharmacotherapy 02/2015; 49(5). DOI:10.1177/1060028014558289 · 2.92 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Combination therapy for type 2 diabetes using agents with complementary mechanisms of action may improve glycemic control to a greater extent than monotherapy and allow the use of lower doses of antihyperglycemic medications. Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors, including saxagliptin, are recommended as add-on therapy to metformin and as part of two- or three-drug combinations in patients not meeting individualized glycemic goals with metformin alone or as part of a dual-therapy regimen. This article reviews the efficacy and safety of saxagliptin as an add-on therapy to metformin, glyburide, a thiazolidinedione, or insulin (with or without metformin) and as a component of triple therapy with metformin and a sulfonylurea.
    Clinical Diabetes 10/2014; 32(4):170-7. DOI:10.2337/diaclin.32.4.170